1 |
Duncan wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> Steve Dibb <beandog@g.o> posted 470CD9B5.3000706@g.o, |
4 |
> excerpted below, on Wed, 10 Oct 2007 07:55:01 -0600: |
5 |
> |
6 |
>> The reason we have mp3 and lame use flag is because there is more than |
7 |
>> one mp3 encoder. In almost every case of the use flag being applied |
8 |
>> above, there is already support for another mp3 codec (ffmpeg). So, |
9 |
>> lame adds support for lame, not for mp3, which is also provided. |
10 |
> |
11 |
> In that case, shouldn't the description mention that? Something like: |
12 |
> |
13 |
> MP3 encoding support using LAME (as opposed to ffmpeg) |
14 |
> |
15 |
What about when the next one gets added-- would it need to say "as opposed |
16 |
to ffmpeg or lame"? |
17 |
|
18 |
I agree where there's a choice, the ebuild should offer lame or ffmpeg or |
19 |
w/e, and where not simply mp3 (along with the encode/decode being |
20 |
orthogonal.) |
21 |
|
22 |
|
23 |
-- |
24 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |